chore: bump ruff version from 0.3.3 to 0.9.2 and fix some invalid/dead noqas #3282
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bluenote10
commented
Jan 20, 2025
| @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ async def search_tags_by_name_api(q: Optional[str] = '', factory=Depends(object_ | |||
| 'id': tag.uuid, | |||
| 'name': tag.name, | |||
| 'color': tag.color, | |||
| 'description' 'run_count': len(tag.runs), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks very much like an existing bug, no?
|
Would it be possible to move forward with this? Is there anything I can do to help speeding things up / simplifying the review? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I noticed that the ruff version was a bit outdated, and that there where quite a lot of spurious/dead
# noqalingering around.This PR bumps ruff to the latest version, which has lead to a minor re-formatting of some code (mainly around fusing string literals).
I've also enabled a few ruff rules that have helped me to identify dead or malformed (
# noqa <code>instead of the needed# noqa: <code>patter) noqa rules.Regarding
F401: Here we should stick to the library interface conventions from the official specs. Otherwise type checkers will not understand the symbols exported in these modules, which is a frequent paint point on user side, when libraries suppressF401. There are basically two options:__all__list manually.X as Xpattern to mark these symbols as explicitly public (and to differentiate them from actual unused imports).I felt that the latter fits better to how Aim maintains its library interface.
My plan is to fully fix all
F401in a follow-up, because the broken library interface is biting us.